Wondering if anyone knows why the line north of Newcastle averages only 80mph to Edinburgh unlike most of the ECML south of it? The line is largely straight, has no conflict with other trains so is the track or wiring bad there or what's the story? Just thinking that if that stretch was brought up to 125mph standard over more of it, there could be a few minutes saving there?!!
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Newcastle to Edinburgh...
- Thread starter RichW1
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
sprinterguy
Established Member
Largely straight? The Northumberland section of the ECML is quite likely the most sinuous section of the route, which is why the speed is so low. For a start, there's a 50mph speed limit on the curve through Morpeth, and there are plenty of other sections of twisty line up to Berwick and into the Scottish borders.
Failed Unit
Established Member
I was thinking the same thing myself it is very bending in the boarders area, a Morpeth bypass would be welcome (but expensive), but it is 125mph where t can be!
I just recall the area north of Morpeth being quite straight but then that is only as far as Alnmouth or so, so yes you're right I withdraw my thread! I just felt 80mph average was a bit low in any case; even Anglia could manage that at a very big push! I feel Scotland suffers great injustice on rail services. I'm sure there's a lack of investment there.
sprinterguy
Established Member
Indeed, I think the biggest time saving would be from introducing a Morpeth bypass. And perhaps introducing tilting trains would be able to do for the Northumberland coast section of the ECML what it has done in reducing journey times on the Cumbrian section of the WCML. As you say, it currently is 125mph in as many places as is possible.
Really? What about the class 380s, the A to B link and EGIP? Is that not enough investment?
tbtc
Veteran Member
Several problems.
Firstly, the line is fairly straight from Newcastle to Berwick (apart from Morpeth - something Virgin planned to by-pass)
Secondly, the route via Berwick is about 120 miles, compared to 100 miles "as the crow flies"
Thirdly, there are a few twists in the Borders which would be hard to avoid
Fourthly, there are limited chances to overtake a slow ScotRail stopper between Drem and Waverley
Fifthly, as mrcheek suggests, you can appreciate (1) Lindisfarne, (2) Berwick upon Tweed and (3) the cliffs north of Berwick - one of the nicest bits of railway in the country
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Agreed; Scotland is one of three areas to get "above average" investment since privatisation (the others being Greater London and the WCML). As an exciled Scot, I don't think Scotland can claim to be hard done by
The 380's offer a 125mph service from London taking some 4hours 10 to 4hr 25mins so no that's not great investment in linking Scotland to London I don't feel; offering 2 slow lines to the English borders before continuing at an outdated 125mph speed to the capital. To be honest there is a torturous alignment of rail on the WCML that's not changed since it was built and similar as I now conceed from the borders area to Edinburgh on the ECML. I feel this doesn't make rail very attractive south of the Central Belt.
2 main lines, both with low speeds at the Scottish end desperately wanting to link 3.5 million people catchment with London; no wonder many fly! When
2 main lines, both with low speeds at the Scottish end desperately wanting to link 3.5 million people catchment with London; no wonder many fly! When
Failed Unit
Established Member
I know that it is pie in the sky and it will never be passed but the other good thing a Morpeth bypass will give is an overtaking chance, so a stopping train could also be introduced. 1h20 is possible from Edinburgh - Newcastle so I wonder how much time the Morpeth bypass would reduce the journey time alone.
tbtc
Veteran Member
We could do with a Mussleurgh by-pass for similar reasons!
(or divert all North Berwick/ Newcraighall services via the Meadowbank loop)
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,856
380s?
Hardly fair to call the WCML a Slow Line! It's only slow around Carstairs and from Newton-Glasgow!
I also believe someone on here reported recently that in Anglo-Scottish travel, rail have gained from air?
I think 4h1- approx is good time from London to Glasgow/Edinburgh, i hardly think people are put off. It is also fairly complex to reroute the ECML/WCML now, both seem to be necessarily 'bendy' through Northumberland/Lakeland, so realigning to save 5-10 minutes maybe would be too much of an investment...
The class 380s aren't capable of 125mph (as designed currently) and aren't running to London, so I'm not sure what your point is here.
The WCML and ECML are two of the fastest mainlines in the UK, so I'm not sure why you are saying they are slow? As for upgrading them, I wouldn't even try. The WCML upgrade was a farce so I would rather not mess up the ECML for months on end. If we're going to increase rail speeds to Scotland then we need to build a true new High Speed rail link. Not try and upgrade extensively what we already have.
Failed Unit
Established Member
I find the North Berwick trains don't normally get in the way on normal running, but I must admit are a total pain when delays happen. I have been on the 1130 service and we left at 1142, i think it was Prestonpans before we got past the local! If we hadn't got stuck behind the local we would have probably caught up the lost 12 minutes by York, instead we just continued to lose time as we were put behind another stopping service at Newcastle, not even allowed to pass at Darlington :roll:
Even something simple like making a station have a passing place would help so an express could pass while the local was stopping.
sprinterguy
Established Member
,
Wait a minute, even just considering Scotland's links to London:
The Scottish central belt has two fairly recently modernised, electrified main lines connecting it to London: The recent WCML upgrade means that London can be reached from both Glasgow (via WCML) and Edinburgh (via ECML) in four and a half hours, and Glasgow has more trains to London now than it ever has in the past, now almost hourly clockface departures. Both main lines have modern rolling stock; the electrification of the ECML at the start of the nineties isn't that long ago in railway terms, and the West Coast has the even newer Pendolinos which, like 'em or loath 'em, have revolutionised the West Coast route.
IMO, Scotland's two largest cities get a better deal with their rail services than, say, somewhere like Bristol, which last saw major investment in 1976 when it received the first batch of brand new HSTs which it is still making use of, with any electrification plans in serious doubt, despite being considerably closer to the English capital than either Glasgow or Edinburgh.
Exactly sprinterguy, I don't see how anyone can argue that Scotland isn't receiving enough investment. Personally I think the North of England, Wales and the South West are all receiving less investment than Scotland or London and are just as deserving as either of them.
The WCML and ECML are moderate speed at best for the 21st century. I wouldn't try upgrading either, it's pointless now and too late with HSL and ERTMS coming up in the future so I do agree with you! Still doesn't change the fact that they'll still be getting a raw deal fro at least the next 15years on travel times to the capital for business.
Lets see. New 334's about 5-6 years ago. New 380's entering service in the next year.
Alloa, Newcraighall, Larkhall, Anniesland-Maryhill Curve and Bathgate-Airdrie lines all reopened very recently.
Plus, various stations in the country have reopened aswell.
I would say the investment is quite good in Scotland (& Wales for that matter with the Ebbw Vale line reopening to passengers).
When I say in Scotland let me make this clear....I mean BETWEEN Scotlands Central Belt and London. Pendolinos are going now faster than trains did in 1976, this is a failure. Period. No Excuses.
The north of England can handle 125mph as it offers edequate timings to London, furthermore it is so with Bristol and South Wales. Let's just look at economics here for a minute.....The Central Belt of Scotland ie Glasgow and Edinburgh CBD's are far more valuable to the British economy than Bristol. I'm not saying Bristol deserves to be shunned but Anglo Scottish services deserve to be faster now regardless of how new the lines are in terms of new trains and upgrading!
It's no good introducing new trains and clockface timetables if you can't beat 1980's timings with £10billion or more!
The north of England can handle 125mph as it offers edequate timings to London, furthermore it is so with Bristol and South Wales. Let's just look at economics here for a minute.....The Central Belt of Scotland ie Glasgow and Edinburgh CBD's are far more valuable to the British economy than Bristol. I'm not saying Bristol deserves to be shunned but Anglo Scottish services deserve to be faster now regardless of how new the lines are in terms of new trains and upgrading!
It's no good introducing new trains and clockface timetables if you can't beat 1980's timings with £10billion or more!
90019
Established Member
Delivered 10-11 years ago, but weren't in service until 2002.
sprinterguy
Established Member
Investment in Scotland's Railways is brilliant, both on the internal services and the anglo-scottish links!
1. A plentiful fleet of largely modern DMUs (Lots of Turbostars) which means that Scotrail can run five and six carriage trains as demand requires.
2. Widespread electrification of the central belt ongoing at the moment, with brand new EMUs.
3. Line reopenings: Newcraighall, Alloa, Airdrie to Bathgate, Larkhall and the Borders Railway.
4. Fast, regular links to London with modern electric Intercity trains from both Glasgow and Edinburgh, and direct trains to London from Aberdeen and Inverness.
I don't see 125mph as a moderate speed: Britain has some of the fastest classic Intercity routes in Europe: Ideally, High Speed 2 needs to reach Scotland in order to provide much increased speeds from central England and London, as upgrades to the ECML and WCML can only go so far: I think that some upgrading of the ECML in Northumberland and the borders would go quite a way to help though: Station passing loops would be a smart move, to allow the fast trains to overtake the stoppers on what is pretty much entirely a two track railway.
1. A plentiful fleet of largely modern DMUs (Lots of Turbostars) which means that Scotrail can run five and six carriage trains as demand requires.
2. Widespread electrification of the central belt ongoing at the moment, with brand new EMUs.
3. Line reopenings: Newcraighall, Alloa, Airdrie to Bathgate, Larkhall and the Borders Railway.
4. Fast, regular links to London with modern electric Intercity trains from both Glasgow and Edinburgh, and direct trains to London from Aberdeen and Inverness.
I don't see 125mph as a moderate speed: Britain has some of the fastest classic Intercity routes in Europe: Ideally, High Speed 2 needs to reach Scotland in order to provide much increased speeds from central England and London, as upgrades to the ECML and WCML can only go so far: I think that some upgrading of the ECML in Northumberland and the borders would go quite a way to help though: Station passing loops would be a smart move, to allow the fast trains to overtake the stoppers on what is pretty much entirely a two track railway.
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,856
Train times on the WCML full have been cut from about 4h55 fastest to about 4h30 on average now (since 1989).
That is a very good time saving in 20 years, and I feel the level of investment has been very nice towards Scotland recently.
Personally, I think people are pleased by Anglo-Scottish times now, it doesn't need more money throwing at it, and we certainly don't need HS2 there!
That is a very good time saving in 20 years, and I feel the level of investment has been very nice towards Scotland recently.
Personally, I think people are pleased by Anglo-Scottish times now, it doesn't need more money throwing at it, and we certainly don't need HS2 there!
tbtc
Veteran Member
So, what do you want?
The WCML has more services (from Scotland) to Manchester than ever before, more services to Birmingham than ever before and more services to London than ever before.
The ECML has a half hourly service from Edinburgh to London for the busiest part of the day, as well as hourly daytime cross country services to Leeds etc (there were only a couple of XC services north of Newcastle before the Voyagers).
Scotland has had new lines in recent years (Alloa, A2B, Anniesland etc) as well as additional stations on existing lines (Laurencekirk, Dunfermline St Margarets etc).
Services on most key lines in Scotland are double what they were at privatisation (pre National Express there was a half hourly Ediburgh - Falkirk High - Glasgow, three trains an hour over the Forth Bridge)
New DMUs and EMUs by the bucketload...
So, rather than criticising, please tell me what you think would be an acceptable level of service and acceptable speed/ times?
I totally agree with you in the domestic sense of Scottish Investment. I have to say though, services to Aberdeen used to use mark3's and now they get commuter style trains, I'm not sure that's a step forward. It reminds me of the ridiculous debacle we have with Trans-Pennine using 100mph untis from Manchester to Scotland in commuter seating form...crazy! Takes 4 hours too!
Nonetheless there is investment domestically in Scotland. I just don't agree with the Anglo-Scottish perspective for no other reason than the timings. 4 hs 10 to 4hr30 or whatever it is isn't attractive. I realise we have the fastest conventional lines in Europe but maybe that's because most of Europe is moving to high speed as a standard format whilst we spent too long deciding we wanted it now?!
I want to love the wcml upgrade but the lack of radio based signalling scaling back the costs just ruins it for me. the ECML was achieving the same time in the 1980's to Edinburgh; I just can't see this as a 21st century step forward.
All comes down to investment I suppose. The timings are not attractive to business particularly. I also stare in disbelief when this was the 3RD ATTEMPT at lifting speeds over 125mph but they blew the budget and the chance.
This smacks of common sense. Sack this man immediately.
So improved frequencies don't count as a step forward?
So rather than just criticising what do you propose is done?
tbtc
Veteran Member
You realise that you are comparing the fastest timing of a handful of trains a day to a fairly intense half hourly service, don't you?
The ECML must be one of the most intense frequencies over a line of that length anywhere around
Ok, the level of service is perfect! The level of service couldn't actually be any better, my problem is the timings and the trains used!!
Example: Manchester to Glasgow: An Intercity route using 100mph suburban units - not clever ot appropriate. 4 hours to go 220 odd miles is nothing short of ridiculous on a mostly 125mph route that should be using Intercity type stock.
Timings: We will only resolve this issue with high speed rail getting Edinburgh and Glasgow down to 2hrs40 but I'd have settled even for 3hr30!
I'm not moaning about the new rolling stock although yes, the allocation of some of it for certain routes is ridiculous as far as the passenger is concerned, it's more the wasted billions that could've achieved better times and people hailing times achieved 25 years ago as a success! It really can't be. HSL's are the answer I supoose but I only ask that people don't feel over 4 hours for 400miles in the 21st century is good; it isn't.
I recognise the achievements of the conventional railway in Britain but it's modal choice limit is about 200-250miles before 125mph trains just can't reach major city to city points in attractive anough times over air. The new century is HSL as standard and only that will solve the problem. I think it's sad that Pendolinos could have had a much bigger step change though.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Google tells me its 217 miles from Glasgow to Manchester by road, and looking at NRE it takes approx 3h15 (changing at Preston) or 3h30 (direct).
The 185s are slower, yes, partly because they have to stop at Lockerbie etc. However they weren't built for that route and they certainly aren't "suburban" units - not many suburban routes require 100mph running and I can't think of anything TPE do that is "suburban" (Newcastle to Manchester Airport? Scarborough to Liverpool?)
That's my point! 185's shouldn't be doing such distances with the interior configuration being of a suburban nature not to mention the crowding. I even heard one woman say to her friend when the announcement came on 'didn't think this train would go that far, that'd take ages on here wouldn't it?' She wasn't wrong! They're suburban units in look and in top speed so should not be allocated to routes where Intercity's should be doing the job!! Scarborough to Liverpool is always going to use this type of stock and Newcastle to Manchester airport is made for interurban/trains like the 185's. My only point whilst they work for most routes they do they shouldn't be deployed as the ONLY option to get you from Manchester to Glasgow directly that's all.
Most modern outer suburban or interurban stock is 100mph now standard really. Most of what's ordered seems to be. I mean ok 3hrs 30 to Glasgow from Manchester - never!
Most modern outer suburban or interurban stock is 100mph now standard really. Most of what's ordered seems to be. I mean ok 3hrs 30 to Glasgow from Manchester - never!
- Status